The folks who are cheering this on seem to be the same folks who support net neutrality (Venn Diagram, Professor Perry?) Â Look, if I had an Internet business, I would not want to serve or subsidize these folks. Â But then again, I have always opposed net neutrality rules. Â I suppose that one could argue net neutrality is narrowly about ISP's, so this stuff is not relevant, but what if Cox Communications decided the same thing? Â Do they not have the same rights of association that GoDaddy and GoFundMe have? Â And if every registrar and web hosting company refuse to serve a certain person or viewpoint, does net neutrality at the ISP level even matter? Â This is part of the hypocrisy of companies like Google, which demand Cox act as a common carrier for its YouTube traffic (because Google does not want to foot the full cost of the amount of bandwidth they use) but act as anything but a common carrier in its core search business.

And while we are on rights of association, am I legally required to bake a cake for James Fields?

Postscript: Â I wonder if people on the Left, which dominate most of the calls for net neutrality, would be demanding net neutrality if they thought most ISP's were controlled by folks on the Left? Â Google and Facebook are known to be controlled by the Left, and thus no one on the Left demands neutrality of them Â -- in fact theÂ Left likely would oppose calls for neutrality at Google and Facebook as their hope is that opposing voices to theirs will be disproportionately screened out by these companies.